If you crash seriously enough to displace a strong motor mount what is going to happen to the rest of the air frame?

The original engine bearers also protected the engine itself which was a relatively expensive item but brushless motors are cheap (and don't thrash about) so it may be better to have a mount rigid enough for flight but that will crush/break thus absorbing some of the forces of a crash so minimising the damage to the rest of the air frame.

As Denis says you have to leave alone any setting that is required for straight and level flight so it will still fly with the gyro switched off and make absolutely sure the stability is working in the right direction to counter any motion upset. Negative stability tends to result in a crash in double quick time.

On the first flight I actually switched the gyro off until I was at a safe height and only then switched it on being instantly ready to switch if off again and safe in the knowledge I could still land the plane.

As the gyro rates were only set mid range nothing really happened except it flew very straight and level with no input from me!

After a few flights adjusting the gyro rates to give the level of stability I was happy with it can be left on all the time but beware getting lulled into a false sense of security and end up flying in conditions that really are beyond the plane's capability.

I think Mr T took credit for the announcement but he actually said was "the FAA after reviewing new evidence will ground all 737 -8 and -9 Max aircraft......" rather than "I have instructed the FAA......."

First you must make sure that the round 12 connector from any source has the correct polarity (+ and -) for your LiPo charger before you connect anything. The charger should be marked to show what is required.

The drill charger is a bit small (0.5A) for your charger which requires 0.8A. As long as the = and- are the right way round on the 12 v connector it should work but it could take longer to charger the LiPo.

The train transformer has sufficient power but does it have more than one output? Is the main output reversible so the train can go either way?. As stated above the 12V connector must have the + and - the right way round.

Any fixed socket on the train transformer could be AC and would be of no use for your charger.

Remember a LiPo does not like to be left fully charged for long periods (weeks) and neither does it like to be run down below a certain cell voltage. For 'bench testing' (do not fit the prop!) you will only use a small amount of its capacity so it only needs a small charge or maybe none at all..

EDFs were originally all in runners as they were the natural choice for smaller diameter and high rpm and this is still true for the smaller (<40 mm) EDFs where it gets more and more difficult to keep the out runner bell within the fan hub diameter.

As the can on an in runner is static it is relatively easy to add a tail cone to streamline the flow after the motor although not all seem to bother.

Out runners cool better than in runners indeed some in runners have to have cooling fins added to the outside of the can. This of course interferes with the airflow a bit.

Its tail plane has been carefully cut out from the fuselage, the slot enlarged and re-glued with the leading edge raised by 2 mm.

This brought the tail plane inline with the required down trim of the elevator . The elevator linkage has now been adjusted so neutral trim is now inline with the tail plane. Should be about right but of course the weather is now far from suitable for test flights!

The undercarriage legs have been reprinted to give a couple of degrees of toe in as pushing the AN2 forward caused the U/C to tend to 'sink' whereas moving backwards caused the opposite.

The is almost no balsa in its construction just in part of the wing struts and tail plane braces so I set about printing these as well although I have no intention of fitting them unless a crash requires it!

The printed wing strut.

It is 4 mm thick, hollow with internal bracing and weighs 4.5 g

There is a small (0.8 mm) hole at the end of each "leg".

This allows the rigging can be directly attached to the strut rather than the complex inserted "tabs" I used originally. Being self colour they do not have to be painted either.

The tail plane braces require a modified fuselage former so would require rather more surgery to actually fit.

Of course the assembly is upside down in this picture but note the use of printer filament to create the attachment pins.

These bits will be kept in the 'spare parts' bag for future use - if required!

As others have suggested it is probably best to buy a new modern 2.4 Tx and receiver9s). It is by far the simplest route.

You can always do as i have done and keep the 35 meg for on some planes and 2.4 for others.

All you need to do is to decide which 'system' but don't to ask which is "best". You will get as many different suggestions as you get answers! Try to find a reason why one is preferable to you over any other.

Remember the attraction force is proportion to the square of the distance so two magnets actually touching require a serious pull to separate hence the advantage of a thin covering to secure the magnet and reduce the pull a bit.

The other way is to use small but deep circular magnets which give a reasonable area for the glue to hold on to.

I like the audible "click" as the two magnets surfaces actually touch then I know the hatch is secure.

My own view is that counter rotating on most twins only makes a difference at the extremes of the low speed end of the flight envelope where the elimination of motor torque will likely delay the advent of wing drop and the 'spiral of death'.

Of course if one engine stops your must not be anywhere near the low speed end of the envelope anyway!

Another issue with the P38 was the problem of an engine failure at the point of take off. Although there was sufficient thrust to continue the take off 'on one' the problem was the single engine torque overcame the ailerons at normal take off speed. At one stage this caused more deaths than from combat..

The Lockheed test pilots found the solution - quickly throttle back the good engine a bit and wait for the speed build up.

With the continued unseasonal weather the AN 2 has flown again with the elevator linkage adjusted and the battery moved forward 20 mm.

The object was to test the flaps. With full flap it made very slow progress into what was a very gentle breeze. Of course there was a huge apparent difference is speed of about 3:1 as it turned down wind!

The other factor duly tested was the break away undercarriage! An untidy landing with a noticeable cross wind gust caused the LH bracing to break cleanly away from its fuselage mountings.

No other damage so print another and install - simples!

This is the position of the elevator in normal 'trimmed' levle flight.

I don't want to move the battery any further forward as it will cause it to nose over too easily so the only alternative is to adjust the tail plane incidence a degree or two. It will require some careful 'surgery' to achieve.

I really mustn't grumble as it does fly just like it is supposed to - slowly!

You should really take it back for a refund or replacement as the drill is clearly not usable as supplied.

Anything else could leave you with a fairly heavy piece of scrap!

Of course you might get the two tapers to match using valve grinding paste as you do when grinding in a valve seat but it would be a horrendous "bodge" that would leave the chuck and drill as a unique matched pair!.